Sorry, little one. You will have to die so that I can feel good with myself.

The narrow, but clear defeat in Alabama forces yours truly to write a couple of considerations about how this could happen. I see, in the main, four causes (actually three and a half), which I will proceed to explain in order or importance.

1. The Sanctimonious Judases

Slandering a candidate with baseless accusations has evidently paid. Hundreds of thousands of white conservative voters thought it better to stay home as their precious feelings were hurt by fake accusations of alleged behaviour of more than 40 years ago. It really speaks against universal suffrage that so many would be so dumb.

With an extremely important seat in play for tax reform, judicial appointments, the Wall and the killing of Obamacare, they have chosen to feel good with themselves instead. I hope their Obamacare premiums will skyrocket next year, the year thereafter and in 2020 before (as I understand) the seat last won by Sessions in 2014 becomes available again. Also, pretty likely, no tax cuts. One can hope this is still not the end of sensible judicial appointments (Gorsuch was appointed with the vote of several Democratic Senators), but it does not make future appointments easier for sure. Congratulations, you idiots.

The lesson to be drawn here is one I have already mentioned in the past: if your candidate promises to be a solid, dependable pro-life, pro-Trump, pro-Wall candidate in 2018 you vote for him even if he used to be a Black Panther member in 1972. It beggars belief that the slaughter on one million children a year should not be made one step nearer to termination because of – in this case: alleged; but it's truly not relevant – the desire of people who profess to be conservative and pro-life to feel good with themselves.

If Moore had been elected it would have been a win-win. Either he is investigated or not. If he is investigated and removed, there is all the time to find a suitable replacement. The seat remains Republican at all times. Now the seat is occupied by a chap who wants the right to abortion up to the moment of birth, a position more extreme than even Planned Parenthood's.

Again: congratulations, you idiots. May God forgive you.

I am not sure He will.

2. The Republican Establishment

Not much to say on this. The obscene spectacle of the top ranks amongs Senate Republicans asking for Moore to stand aside – before tepidly supporting him, the cowardly mongrels, when it looked likely he would win – makes clear once again that Mitch McConnell & Co. are the enemy number one of the pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, pro-tax reform, pro-wall, anti-Obamacare agenda. They do not care how much losses it costs if it helps them to expunge Trump from their ranks. McConnell is working for the opposition day in and day out. He should be the first to be made to go, then he has not only managed to lose twice, but he plans to lose whenever a victory would benefit Trump. The so-called GOP is infested by little Grima Wormtongues, working for the enemy with a brazenness I have never seen in Italy, Germany, or England.

3. Donald Trump

Like McConnell, Trump has lost twice. In his case, he has lost because he wanted to be prudent, and has tried to play Machiavelli : if Moore wins, I have supported him; if he loses, I will say Luther Strange would have been the right pick.

This is a very dangerous game, because Trump will now find it more difficult to push his agenda in the Senate. The very narrow defeat makes the wound more painful.

Trump should have travelled to Alabama several times, and he should have thrown his considerable popularity in the game, instead of limiting himself to a handful of tweets and statements. He should have been photographed with Moore for all the planet to see, causing Democratic outrage and a huge Wave Of Deplorables. He should have considered this the priority number one of his work in the weeks leading to the election. He should have campaigned for him with the message that it is important to keep the Senate inRepublican hands, and any – improbable – ground for resignation can be handled later. His support for Moore was clear, but not enthusiastic. Not anywhere near a Trump Train.

Trump's victory in 2016 does not mean that the game is won. The mobilisation must be pursued again and again. It beggars belief that the Democrats could get the Black vote out in record numbers, whilst the Deplorables stayed home. It is necessary to awaken the same spirit of 2016 every single time, and Trump must be a vital part of it.

3.5 Roy Moore

One does not really want to blame the guy for being himself. But I read things that I thought were from another century, like his dislike for big TV campaigns and massive spending, as if he would win just because he prays. Ground game and TV campaigns are important, and they cost a lot of money. It is neither dirty nor dishonourable to use them. God helps those who help themselves.

This is a blow, but not a KO. However, the failure to energise the voters in November 2018 could end up with Trump losing both House and Senate, just – if memory serves – like Clinton in 1994. The Democrats have a far better ground game, and without a great Deplorables' Rise next year this will have a great impact on the final result.

Next year's battle must be on two fronts: the Primaries to weed out as many RINOs as reasonably practicable, and the elections to keep both House and Senate in Republican hands and the least possible number of RINOs.

This was a blow, but I would still not want to be the other side. However, it goes to show how easy it is to squander even the most beautiful of pacific popular uprisings.

From 50,000 to 16,000 in two short years until 2015 (with the novelty effect built-in at least in the 2013 figures) already speak a clear language. The figures for 2016 are told to be around 10,000, only 20% of the first Francisyear. This 2017 which now goes to an end was very probably even worse.

No one is interested in a Pope who “doesn’t pope”. It’s full of comedians on TV and they at least are funny. A clown with a dour face and a hypocrisy that can be smelled one mile away is of no interest but to those who go for circus attractions and freak shows. Heck, by the numbers of tourists visiting Rome at pretty much every time of the year, one wonders how the figures can be so low.

Share this:

Like this:

It is, perhaps, fitting to add my two cents to what has already been written about Pope “Evil Clown” Francis approving a modified version of the Our Father for the poor French.

As pretty much always, the problem with Francis is that he does not believe in God. Not believing in God, he thinks that the church is a purely human construct. He also clearly believes that this human construct has done pretty much everything wrong before electing him Pope. Therefore, he proceeds to “improve” on her by proposing alternative teachings, and trying to shape her in the image and likeness of the only god he recognises: comrade Jorge Bergoglio. He did so already concerning communion, marriage, homosexuality, war, poverty, climate change, death penalty, illegal immigration, and countless other matters. Again: it is clear that this man thinks that the Church did everything wrong, from her very beginnings, until he appeared on the scene. This is the clear mark of the atheist.

It is, therefore, no surprise that not even the Our Lord should be spared by this unspeakable scoundrel.

Other have entered into more or less erudite conversations about the exegesis of the word “temptation” and the ways in which ne nos inducas in tentationem can be understood. I frankly don’t care.

What was good for my grandma, and for her grandma before her, is good enough for me. What the Church and the centuries have hallowed, no dirty Argentinian scoundrel is allowed to manipulate. The very idea that the Church may have got the very words of our Lord wrong for centuries is the most obvious evidence of unbelief that can be given.

Like every unbeliever, Francis hides behind various very small and very crooked fingers: historical “research”, literal meaning which “might be misunderstood” (heavens, what a cretin…), a feigned desire to do good, and such like rubbish. This is what every fake believer does as he discusses with you about what “research” tell them about, say, deaconesses, or the role of the priest, or the church’s attitude towards adulterers or homos. Fake research and fake science are always the refuge of true unbelievers.

A Pope tampering with the English translation of dogmatic statements accepted for many generations is a Pope showing that he simply does not believe that the Church has any function at all, and that God would allow the entire Western Christianity to be misled concerning his words; he shows, therefore, that he does not believe in God, as it is absurd to believe in such a mickey mouse god: clearly plagued with communication problems, not even able to make himself understood when he talks to his creatures, and obviously unable to enforce the most elementary standards concerning himself.

Pope Francis is clearly a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, and an extremely arrogant man. But he is also extremely stupid, as he is clearly unable to understand how his vanity and arrogance expose him as a boor, and a miserable ass dressed in white, for everyone who has any trace of sensus catholicus left in him.

Like this:

This blog post addresses some of the causes of the diminished authority of the priest in the Western world.

I for myself would add my two pence: what makes most of the credibility problem of priests nowadays is that very many of them are as fake as a six pound note, clearly ashamed of their own profession and – generally speaking and forgetting for a moment that they can consecrate the host – a waste of space.

A priest who is not afraid of being a Catholic priest can be criticised, berated or even insulted. But everyone, even his own enemies, will know he is authentic.

On the other hand, no one has any use for a priest who speaks like a snake oil salesman, never disagrees with anyone if it costs even a shade of conflict, and limits himself to the most useless, trite banalities about social justice (for which we already have bad politicians galore), or “the joy of Christ” which strangely seems to exclude the fear of the Lord, or to the flattery of his own parishioners in the most sugary, cheesy, stupid way (“thank you for being you!” is one I will never forget).

Then of course the one or other is suspected of being a homo, or does not give any sign of testosterone ownership at all. They have suspiciously high-pitched voices, and an affected gentleness of ways unbecoming a man. When people are left wondering whether everything is in order with him, Father has already lost.

In order to be respected, a Catholic priest must be, in this order, a) a man and b) a Catholic. If the one or other component is lacking, the public (not only the Pewsitter) will see the guy for what he is: a fake, a pretense, an excuse of a priest. As a result, no one will respect him. Not the real Catholics, and not those outside the Church. Fake vocations have a way of stinking from very far away and in the same way as true revolutionaries can easily spot the fake revolutionary, true Catholics can easily spot the modern priest as a fraud.

No, I don’t think it has to do with education, as priests used to be respected by illiterate peasants and extremely well educated people alike. It has to do with the fact that Church has become almost unable to produce respectable priests, and produces instead unmanly social justice whinos no one would want to be identified with and whom no youth would take as a model.

Priests are often despised because they are often despicable. When the average quality improves the respect and reputation will grow, too.

The fact-free, empty heads of the Liberals will surely find some reason to keep believing in their false religion.

Sane people – people who get up early in the morning, go to work, care for their home and family, cook for their children and teach them to pray – keep living in the normal world, which keeps going on in its normal way whilst good-for-nothing failed students and future failures in life keep obsessing about various stupidities, making profiteers a’ la Al Gore very rich in the process.

Like this:

One can’t avoid having sympathy for Padre Minutella, who – in the usual, pleasantly emotional Italian way, see the video above – has no timidity and, in fact, great courage in resisting to the heresies of our time.

However, there is a fundamental problem in father Minutella’s thinking. Whilst he has a traditional mindset, he is not – as he states (in English) here – a Traditionalist.

He is not a Traditionalist because he refuses to see in the very spirit, in the very idea of Vatican II the origin of the problem.

Padre Minutella is, in a way, an emotional version of Cardinal Ratzinger; sharing with him the belief that the problem is not the Second Vatican Council, but various manipulations or misrepresentations that followed it.

This is a big problem and I think that, in time, Father Minutella will understand it himself. Every “Ratzingerian” conservative is trying to sit between two chairs, of which one has rotten legs, all the while maintaining that the position is comfortable and, in fact, the only fitting one.

Best wishes to this courageous priest. But heavens, it is high time that he realises where all the problem originated, and stops thinking that the problem started in, say, 2013.

After that, let us reflect on the sorry state of the Church after 60 years of V II.

The need to even state that a Catholic is not allowed to follow a teaching that does not correspond to the perennial teaching of the Church is depressing. I do not blame the theologian. I blame the Argentinian (and all other V II) priests who have practiced Papolatry all these years.

Just as depressing is the fact that the theologian feels the need to clarify that it is absolutely false to think that “they must now endorse the Buenos Aires approach under pain of heresy”. Apparently, some people think that being a heretic, nowadays, is not endorsing heresy.

Francis’ Amoris Laetitia statements are called “novel teaching”. Would you call 2+2=5 a “novel teaching?” I would call it rubbish, not novel teaching. Francis spreads and defends heresy and it is time that theologians, anonymous or otherwise, start calling an evil clown an evil clown

Lack of clarity leads to confusion. To say to a confused (and very ignorant, and sorely in need of instruction) Catholic that Francis is proposing a “novel teaching” is very dangerous, because it gives to heresy the dignity of teaching.

Let our yea be yea. let us heresy by its proper name. Enough with walking on eggshells.

The Age of Confusion will only end when clarity of speaking take its place.

Come, Pray The Rosary!

Daily Offering to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

The Francis Papers

Why This Blog

Pope Pius XII in Prayer

Five Million Pageviews

Non Praevalebunt

“What Catholics Once were…”

"What Catholics once were, we are. If we are wrong, then Catholics through the ages have been wrong.
We are what you once were. We believe what you once believed.
We worship as you once worshipped. If we are wrong now, you were wrong then. If you were right then, we are right now".

Mundabor’s Blog

Pope XII: “Suicide Of Altering the Faith In Her Liturgy…..”

"I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. … I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past.
"A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'"

Eugenio Pacelli, future Pius XII.

Roche, "Pie XII Devant L'Historie", p. 52-53

G.K. Chesterton: Malice & Spite

"If a critic tells a particular lie, that particular lie can be pointed out. If he misses a specific point, that point can be explained. If he is really wrong in this or that, it will be on this or that that the insulted person will eagerly pounce. But “malice and spite” are vague words which will never be used except when there is really nothing to pounce on. If a man says that I am a dwarf, I can invite him to measure me. If he says I am a cannibal, I can invite him to dinner. If he says I am a coward, I can hit him. If he says I am a miser, I can give him half-a-sovereign. But if he says I am fat and lazy (which is true), the best I can answer is that he speaks out of malice and spite. Whenever we see that phrase, we may be almost certain that somebody has told the truth about somebody else."
The Illustrated London News, 13 November 1909.

G.K. Chesterton: Dogma & Authority

The modern world will accept no dogmas upon any authority; but it will accept any dogmas on no authority. Say that a thing is so, according to the Pope or the Bible, and it will be dismissed as a superstition without examination. But preface your remark merely with “they say” or “don’t you know that?” or try (and fail) to remember the name of some professor mentioned in some newspaper; and the keen rationalism of the modern mind will accept every word you say.

G.K. Chesterton: Progress & Fashion

The world is what the saints and the prophets saw it was; it is not merely getting better or merely getting worse; there is one thing that the world does; it wobbles. Left to itself, it does not get anywhere; though if helped by real reformers of the right religion and philosophy, it may get better in many respects, and sometimes for considerable periods. But in itself it is not a progress; it is not even a process; it is the fashion of this world that passeth away. Life in itself is not a ladder; it is a see-saw.

G.K. Chesterton: Tradition

“Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about.”

Ronald Reagan & The Unborn Children

"NOW THEREFORE, I, RONALD REAGAN, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim and declare the unalienable Personhood of every American, from the moment of conception until natural death, and I do proclaim, ordain, and declare that I will take care that the Constitution and laws of the United States are faithfully executed for the protection of America's unborn children. Upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God. I also proclaim Sunday, January 17, 1988, as a national Sanctity of Human Life Day. I call upon the citizens of this blessed land to gather on that day in their homes and places of worship to give thanks for the gift of life they enjoy and to reaffirm their commitment to the dignity of every human being and sanctity of every human life".

George W. Bush & Those Waiting To Be Born

“All human life is a gift from our creator that is sacred, unique and worthy of protection. On National Sanctity of Human Life Day, our country recognizes that each person, including every person waiting to be born, has a special place and purpose in this world”. [...]

“The most basic duty of government is to protect the life of the innocent. [...]

“The sanctity of life is written in the hearts of all men and women. On this day and throughout the year, we aspire to build a society in which every child is welcome in life and protected in law. We also encourage more of our fellow Americans to join our just and noble cause. History tells us that with a cause rooted in our deepest principles and appealing to the best instincts of our citizens, we will prevail.”

George W. Bush
Presidential proclamation of "National Sanctity of Human Life Day", January 18, 2009